The comments of Commissioner Lee and of Commissioner Peirce reflect the very different economic philosophies of the two commissioners.

Commissioner Lee criticizes the rule amendments for being insufficiently prescriptive as to the regulation of competing consolidators. She is not satisfied that competition among consolidators that are required to provide service level information is sufficient to motivate the consolidators to provide a good product; she wants the SEC to regulate more…

The debate as to whether regulators should govern through the establishment of general principle or specific requirements is an ongoing one, and will necessarily vary with the circumstances. For a good discussion of the issue, see . In an area that is fast-changing and technology-driven, and where the regulated entities have a strong incentive to keep up with best practices, a principles-based framework seems the right approach.

Assuming that the Chinese government does not agree to allow U.S. regulators access to accounting firms based in China, the logical next step would be for Chinese issuers to deregister under the Exchange Act. In addition to delisting, which will be mandatory under the bill as passed, deregistration may also require Chinese issuers to seek to reduce the number of their U.S. holders, perhaps by conducting buybacks.

There are a number of interpretive points in the bill that are worth…

Commissioner Peirce's statement reflects her skepticism of standardized ESG disclosure, a skepticism that is consistent with the current majority view at the SEC. Division Director Blass asks challenging questions as well.

Supporters of a mandated ESG disclosure regime (e.g., ) advocate for a GAAP-type disclosure format. To date, however, they have not put out any specific proposals as to what such disclosure would look like or require. Perhaps these are to come shortly.